State v. Acker
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DRANGINIS, J.
The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether, in a prosecution under General Statutes § 22-363,1 also known as our “nuisance dog” statute, the state must prove the identity of the specific dog or dogs causing the nuisance. We hold that it does not and, accordingly, reverse the judgments of the trial court.2
*143The court found the following facts. The defendant, Frederick Acker, is the operator of a commercial kennel known as the Animal Adoption Network, Inc. The kennel is located in a residential neighborhood in Monroe, is licensed to board fifty dogs and has harbored up to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Spears v. GarciaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- State v. GibbsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Herbert v. SmythSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1967
- Doe v. RapoportConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. AckerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004